The two movies also share one thing in common, they’re
both European stories that, as a positive sign of Hollywood’s recognition that
foreigners make up a huge share of the overall box office, have not been
Americanized in the slightest. Of course, being big budget, special effects extravaganzas, as only Hollywood could really afford to make, they are
still in English. That’s the other economic reality. Hollywood still won’t
take chances on subtitles fearing turning local audiences off of their movies.
I actually grew up with the adventures of Tintin, the
young intrepid Belgian reporter, created by the Belgian artist Hergé (Georges Remi), over 23 comic books, as my
grandparents (who moved there from Poland) and my mother, who was born there,
were from that country. When I was young, reading them in their original French, my memories of the strip were that they contained exciting, exotic
adventures, were populated by eccentric/amusing characters and were drawn with
a simple but effective style. That last might seem too hard to duplicate on
screen but Spielberg, utilizing performance capture animation, pulls it off
flawlessly.
Performance capture animation requires photographing actors, particularly their facial and physical expressions, and then
grafting them as animated figures on the screen making them look like actors
playing the roles. (Motion capture is the process of photographing the whole person. The use of it for film is performance capture.) Robert Zemeckis’ The Polar Express (2004) was one such
movie but it was a rather impersonal, cold project. The Adventures of Tintin is a warmer, personality driven effort and
much more pleasing and entertaining as cinema. It’s a refreshingly different
looking movie, too, an animated flick that looks like it’s been bred with a live
action movie, adding up to something unique on screen.
The Thomson/Thompson twins and Tintin |
With The
Adventures of Tintin, and (for him) the new technology at hand, Spielberg
is clearly having the time of his life behind the camera. Long single takes, darting angles, off kilter
shots, his direction is impeccable and highly inventive. He's aided by the
screenplay’s witty take on what’s going on, be it the twins being hoodwinked by
slick pickpocket, Aristides Silk (Toby Jones), or Tintin’s landlady’s blasé
reaction to the violence and mayhem that follows her tenant home. The film looks smashing and even the 3D
elements of it work. Spielberg’s confident and light touch here imparts the exact
cinematic tone largely absent in Martin Scorsese’s fantastical adventure Hugo. (However having seen Tintin and the 3D Hugo just two days apart, I can safely say that this cinematic
process is not good for the eyes. I wanted to take the 3D glasses off during
the latter movie.) And the film’s characterizations, including Daniel Craig’s
villainous collector Ivan Ivanovitch Sakharine and (in flashbacks,) pirate Red
Rackham, are delightful, though it’s initially a bit jarring to hear Bell’s
English accent coming out of Tintin’s mouth. (The photo stills illustrating this post make the characters’ movements
seem jerky, but that is emphatically not the case.) The movie also convincingly
feels like an old fashioned thirties set adventure with only the odd phrase –
such as Third World, actually coined in the '50s – seeming out of place.
One interesting and understandable deviation from the
film’s source material is its treatment of Captain Haddock, whose drinking,
(actually alcoholism, though it was never identified as such in the comics),
was always treated with blithe disregard by Hergé. Obviously in 2011, and in a
family friendly movie, no less, this cavalier attitude could not be
countenanced by the filmmakers. So Haddock is called on his excessive drinking
by Tintin and pretty much sobers up for the rest of the film. I don’t love this
change entirely – it is a smidgen preachy – but I recognize its necessity.
The movie does eventually become somewhat tiresome as it becomes apparent that it is tonally one note. To
quote Ben Mulroney, the entertainment journalist who hosted a Q and A with star
Jamie Bell after the promotional screening of Tintin: “the film is one big chase movie.” It kind of is, actually,
and certainly in its second half. Part of the problem, too, is the familiarity
of the story. It often echoes, in various ways, the themes and motifs of the Indiana
Jones films from their often wry humour to the far-flung locations where
Tintin finds himself. The only difference might be Tintin's lack of romantic desire. (Tintin is defiantly asexual.) The film is also the first half of a two parter (with the
adventure continued in Red Rackham’s
Treasure) and thus ends abruptly just as it’s getting interesting. (I don’t
know if that sequel will actually be the next Tintin adventure to be adapted as
a movie; Spileberg has only confirmed that The
Lord of the Ring’s Peter Jackson is signed on to direct it, but not which
comic book will be rendered thus.) Unconsciously perhaps, The Secret of the Unicorn may have attracted Spielberg precisely
because of those linkages but there were other Tintin comic books (The Shooting Star, Explorers on the Moon, The
Calculus Affair ) that could have been adapted to fresher, more original
cinematic effect.
Tintin's creator, Hergé |
Finally, of course, there is the cumbersome legacy of
Hergé himself Enjoyable as the Tintin books always were, they were also very
minor affairs, not really saying much that was pertinent or revealing about
Belgium or Europe. They transmuted instead some of Hergé’s conservative and sometimes
contentious, read proto-fascist, mindset. The
Tintins, like The Hardy Boys, were a stepping stone for me, to cleverer,
savvier and more probing adventure stories, usually in the realms of science
fiction (Arthur C. Clarke, Norman Spinrad, Robert Silverberg). Thus, in wanting
to be as faithful to Hergé’s work as possible – and he largely is – Spielberg
was also burdening himself with the tropes of a superficial entertainment. I’ll
emphasize the latter here – the movie is fun – but even with Spielberg at the
top of his game, conceptually The
Adventures of Tintin cannot be anything but a slight, albeit highly skilled, effort.
On the other hand, War
Horse, Spielberg’s other late-season movie, is destined, I am sure, to be
recognized as one of his very finest films, an emotional powerhouse on a par
with Close Encounters of the Third Kind
(1977), E.T.: the Extraterrestrial
(1982), Schindler’s List (1993) and Saving Private Ryan (1998).
Based on Michael Morpurgo’s 1982 classic children’s
novel, later turned into an award winning experimental play War Horse, War Horse (the movie splits the title into two words) tells the seemingly simple
story of an English boy, Albert Narracott (Jeremy Irvine, making his film debut) circa the early 20th
century, and a horse, named Joey. Albert’s troubled father, Ted (Peter Mullan)
a Boer war veteran taken to drink, has bought Joey on an (expensive) whim, even
though the handsome steed is clearly not cut out for subsistence farming. That,
at least, is what Ted’s appalled wife, Rose (Emily Watson) thinks. She’s also
highly fearful that the family will be evicted from their home because the rent
money has been squandered on the horse. Joey, of course turns out to be made of
sterner stuff, and in a theme that wends its way throughout the movie
consistently proves himself to be full of surprises and uncommon strength,
physically and emotionally.
Joey and Jeremy Irvine in War Horse |
The first half hour of War Horse is, admittedly, clunky, offering a sappy, overly cute
portrait of Albert and his family – Rose practically glows as the kind, stern
matriarch, and Ted is more glowering than disturbed – but once the family has
to give Joey up, the film (and Spielberg) hits its stride. Worse, as far as Albert is concerned, Joey's shipped to France to be ridden by the military during the just-declared First
World War. That’s where the film’s second great theme
makes itself manifest. From the moment a sympathetic army captain (Tom
Hiddleston) promises Albert that he’ll take good care of Joey, the horse will
have its defenders who will love and cherish it like it was their own. But none
will care about him as much as Albert, who will risk life and limb to get Joey
back home to safety in England.
While War Horse,
on one level, is a very linear film, it’s also the most expressionistic movie Spielberg
has ever helmed, simply because Joey goes from one owner to the next, British,
German, French and then back again, throughout the movie. Characters appear for
a few short scenes and sequences and then the story moves on to the next protagonist(s).
Often their fates are shocking, even brutal. (That shouldn’t surprise anyone,
Spielberg has, in movies like Saving
Private Ryan and Munich, not been
one to pull his punches or hesitate to kill off beloved individuals.) There are revelatory, emotionally devastating moments
in War Horse, which I won’t spoil
for you, that will long linger in my memory.
The film is also gorgeously shot by Spielberg’s favourite
cinematographer Janusz Kamiński (Schindler’s
List, A.I. Artificial Intelligence)
and subtly scored by the indispensable John Williams, (who’s composed the music
for all but one of Spielberg’s 26 features), adding immeasurably to the beautiful
whole. (The two also performed the same duties, effectively, for The Adventures of Tintin.) The film’s
acting is uniformly fine, too, though David Thewlis’s landlord is almost a
little too oily and villainous.
Steven Spielberg (centre) on the set of War Horse |
Spielberg, and his screenwriters, Lee Hall (Billy Elliot) and Richard
Curtis, tackle straight ahead drama here, which is an unusual departure for Curtis (he's best
known for writing romantic fluff like Four
Weddings and a Funeral and Love
Actually or sharp satiric TV comedy like Blackadder and Spitting
Image). Thankfully, they don’t make the mistake that director Clint Eastwood did in Flags for Our Fathers and Letters from Iwo Jima, which is, morally
equating the sides in the war. Eastwood basically suggested that the same level
of atrocities accrued to both the United States and Japan in World War Two
(They never did; the Japanese approached the Nazis in their viciousness and
brutality. The Americans didn’t even come close.) In War Horse, the Germans, or at least their military machine are portrayed
as more callous and brutal than the British, which is accurate, as the former
are the ones who introduced poisonous mustard gas into the conflict. Yet, the
film balances that potentially racist viewpoint with several depictions of decent
and honourable German soldiers who take Joey under their wing and show high
valour during battle. Working within a more restrictive PG-13 film rating, as he usually does, Spielberg still manages to craft powerful sequences in War Horse that are fully the equal of
those in the much more graphic Saving Private
Ryan (which was originally rated R before garnering a lower film classification) in assailing the
futility, carnage and waste of human lives that is war. That’s the mark of a great director.
Most impressive in the film, however, has to be the
highly touching depiction of Joey and his pal, a horse named Topthorn. It’s not
only that you fall in love with the animals and worry yourself sick about
their possibly getting killed at the front, it’s that they emerge as fully realized
creatures without any obvious anthropomorphism in the process. In that sense, I can only compare War Horse to the way Carroll Ballard portrayed various animals in his terrific movies (The Black Stallion, also about a horse; Never
Cry Wolf; Fly Away Home.) Higher praise cannot be offered. (Astoundingly, fourteen different horses were used
to play Joey at various stages of his life, including eight horses playing him
as an adult; I couldn’t tell that it wasn’t just one horse playing the grown up
role.)
But it’s the emotional content in the movie that, ultimately,
differentiates Spielberg from most of his fellows, a trait that conversely has him
routinely attacked by other critics for birthing schmaltzy, sentimental
pictures. War Horse almost
entirely avoids that trap mostly because Spielberg so sincerely believes in his
material and is not afraid of offering the viewer an honest portrayal of emotion and sentiment
(which is not the same as sentimentality, an occasional Spielberg flaw that enfolds
a dishonest saccharine element.) Truthfully, I can’t think of another director,
except possibly for Peter Jackson, who could have pulled off War Horse, without the film succumbing to a winking cynicism.
With both The Adventures
of Tintin and War Horse, it’s
evident that the 65 year-old Spielberg still remains a force to be reckoned
with in Hollywood and in worldwide filmmaking circles, at a time when his compatriots’
output often seems erratic (Martin Scorsese) or utterly negligible (Francis Ford
Coppola). Tintin may just be a lark
for him, despite his successful rendition of the comic into film, but War Horse cuts much deeper. For fans of
the man, both sides of his prodigious talent, the consummate entertainer and
the committed serious artist are on display this season. In an otherwise largely
wretched year at the movies one couldn’t ask for a better cinematic holiday present.
– Shlomo Schwartzberg is a film critic,
teacher and arts journalist based in Toronto. He teaches regular courses at
Ryerson University's LIFE Institute, where he just finished teaching a course on the
work of Steven Spielberg. He will next be teaching a course there on the films
of Sidney Lumet, beginning on Friday, Feb. 10, 2012.
Couldn't agree more. War Horse and Tintin were spectacular and I can't wait for more from Spielberg.
ReplyDelete